Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Market Gems-Trading Strong Earnings Growth and Momentum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lee kramer who wrote (5741)	3/2/2001 7:49:44 PM
From: Jenna	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6445

Are TLGD and TECH ready to make a move to recover or are these one day wonders? . stockcharts.com[l,a]dbcanymy[pb50!b200!f][vc60][iUc20!Ll14!Lo14] stockcharts.com[l,a]dbcanymy[pb50!b200!f][vc60][iUc20!Ll14!Lo14]

To: lee kramer who wrote (5741)	3/2/2001 7:51:36 PM
From: Jenna	Respond to of 6445

Are TLGD and TECH ready to make a move to recover or are these one day wonders? Okay so according to technical analysis TLGD had a stochastic breakout and bullish engulfing on high volume. What does this mean for monday? The better 'beef' to sink a short, sharp knife into into? technical analysis is fine for intraday lately but does not do a thing for determining the direction of the short term trend. That little blip on the DAILY chart looking like an appendix, will NOT be the determining catalyst for entry. Only if investors decide to rally around the stock and give it a chance and change their sentiment will TLGD and some others continue to move up. Technical analysis will mirror the decision of the investors, but not the other way around. But if the compx keeps dropping to lower lows, I am not interested in being the first of a group of Lemmings to take these home. We decided to trade riding the 5 and 15 minute trendlines breakouts today, without much regard for "the bigger picture".. since we did gap down and recover a bit. The 50% pullback was 2,130 was still basically a "short" scenario and 2,150 would have been worse, but opening at 2111 was very negative and we closed still lower than 2,150. We got overzealous on the long side just for the intraday trade but even shorted once again in the latest reversal period. stockcharts.com[l,a]dicanymy[pb20!b200!f][vc60][iUc20!Ll14!Lo14] stockcharts.com[l,a]dbcanymy[pb20!b200!f][vc60][iUc20!Ll14!Lo14]

To: lee kramer who wrote (5741)	3/6/2001 12:51:33 PM
From: Lane Hall-Witt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6445

Lee -- Kudlow was ahead of the curve in tossing out the Phillips Curve, and I think he's done well to try to hold the Fed accountable to the opportunities of post-Phillips policymaking. But I can't let Kudlow get away with this partisan slander about the "Clinton" decline: we all know that what's hurting us right now is a "Greenspan" decline. The Fed essentially induced a capital-investment panic, and this sudden halt in capex is reverberating through the entire U.S. economy. The Fed -- Greenspan -- has changed the psychology of the U.S. economy from growth to retrenchment, and that is having a huge impact on our economic outlook. Kudlow has never shown even the slightest understanding of the government's role in the American economy during the past 20 years. In particular, he has never understood the impact of the Federal debt on the financial markets and on business investment. The Reagan-Bush debt drained trillions of dollars from the equity and corporate-bond markets and from the borrowing-power of individual consumers. For all the Reagan-Bush talk about keeping the federal government out of people's lives, the fact is that they put the federal government into a head-to-head contest with businesses and with individual borrowers -- fighting it out for the scarce dollars needed to finance consumption and investments. The federal government literally took trillions of dollars out of our pockets during the 1980s and early 1990s. The Clinton economic plan of 1993 started the process of putting that money back into the private sector. It put restraints on the overall growth rate of government and inaugurated a new fiscal discipline that focused like a laser beam on deficit reduction. The ironic result of the 1993 tax increase was that it reduced federal reliance on the capital markets. Today, whenever the federal government buys back T-Bills, it actually pumps cash into the capital markets. Our tax dollars at work--. What's so dispiriting right now is to see Bush throw away the fiscal program that brought us to this point. Clinton and the Democrats paid a huge price for the 1993 tax hike, although it was long overdue and necessary to give the U.S. bond market confidence in the deficit-reduction program. (Bob Woodward's account of the 1993 budget battle in _The Agenda_ is an intriguing read.) To see Bush score easy, unearned political points by giving the tax increase back, radically departing from the existing course that has been so successful in paying down debt, is a betrayal of the difficult choices of 1993 and 1997. Honor and dignity--?